OT way OT but GOOD for Mom!

[Larry Jaques]

Hey, this is USENET, not a court of law. Kangaroos are allowed.

-- Worry is a misuse of imagination. -- Dan Zadra

[Larry Jaques]

If it's Saturday, it must be Lutefisk.

-- Another belief of mine: that everyone else my age is an adult, whereas I am merely in disguise. -- Margaret Atwood

[Larry Blanchard]

That's probably the way it should be handled - DUI. Or as an aggravating factor of any crime committed while UI.

That way we could avoid making criminals rich.

[Han]

Larry Jaques wrote in news: [e-mail]:

Since my daughter in law is from North Dakota I have taken the obligatory bite of lutefisk. It took hours before that foul taste was out of my mouth. I had leftovers from yesterday's swai. Just microwaved with some kind of dill mix over it. At $6/lb it was delicious, and held up well to warming up ...

[HeyBub]

If I have no knowledge he had a gun, there's no foul. If I knew he had a gun, but, again, had no information that he intended to use it in an illegal manner, also no foul.

If I knew he had a gun and intended to shoot somebody and I went along to try and dissuade that action, no foul.

If I knew in advance that my buddy intended to commit an illegal act and I went along to assist in some way, I'm equally guilty of any offense my buddy commits. My assistance can be quite passive, such as a look-out, driving the getaway car, or anything tending to make a success of my buddy's escapade.

Let's take a simply example: If I hold the victim down while my buddy stabs him 18 times thereby ending the victim's life, should I be responsible only for simple assault? After all, I didn't do any stabbing.

[HeyBub]

No, I don't see the logic, nor, evidently, do you.

A passenger in a car is not a participant in any offense in which the driver partakes.

Take it further: You are a passenger in a car. Your buddy, the driver, gets incensed over the actions of another driver, pulls up beside the other driver, and, through the open window, shoots the other driver dead. Are you in any way guilty of anything? Of course not.

If, however, YOU are driving and you buddy says "Pull up beside that asshole so I can shoot his sorry ass," and you do as your buddy asks, you have committed felony murder (in most jurisdictions).

[HeyBub]

That has to be the most idiotic statement I've heard in the last hour.

[HeyBub]

Giggle.

"However, prosecutors have charged his alleged accomplice, 29-year-old Dustin Louis Stewart, with first-degree murder. According to authorities, Stewart was with Martin but ran away from McKinley's home after hearing the gunshots. " 'When you're engaged in a crime such as first-degree burglary and a death results from the events of that crime, you're subject to prosecution for it,' [Assistant District Attorney] Walters said."

[Josepi]

I understand that those "drug legal areas" have been rescinded and no longer exist in the last few years.

--------------

YMMV!

[Larry Jaques]

Which, the perps on the street or those in suits and ties with law degrees?

-- Another belief of mine: that everyone else my age is an adult, whereas I am merely in disguise. -- Margaret Atwood

[HeyBub]

No you don't. We have a teaching moment here; The basic theory of criminal law is that every offence is predicated on the state of mind of the accused. In the example you posit, there is no "mens rea", or guilty mind. Without the requisite criminal (or negligent) intent, there is no crime. Period. End of story. The driver must have known, or should have known, that a robbery was planned before any sanction can attach. Mere presence is not enough because, as you proposed, the presence was entirely innocent.

[Larry Jaques]

I wonder how much Agent Orange is left in the mud over there in swai country...but, yeah, swai is pretty good. Why is some tilapi sweet and mellow, the other very fishy? Is it just old fish before it's frozen?

-- Another belief of mine: that everyone else my age is an adult, whereas I am merely in disguise. -- Margaret Atwood

[HeyBub]

What difference does it make to me where the criminal got the gun if I have to protect myself from him? Traceable? Why? Any time the cops have a gun that COULD be traceable, the crime has already occurred. What difference does it make to me, when accosted by a mope, whether the gun he uses can be traced?

No, the goblin didn't get any guns from me. He was apparently just beginning his squit-eyed actions.

You had better check your facts: Most guns used in crime, so far as authorities know, are NOT committed with stolen guns.

Believe me, every time authorities find a gun that has moved illegally in commerce, those responsible are punished. Except for those thousands of guns whose dodgy sales were sanctioned by the BATF. Most went to drug cartels in Mexico (a good thing) but some ended up on this side of the border where they contributed to the mayhem.

We have the highest percentage of incarceration because we want to keep the crime rate as low as possible. There is an obvious and dramatic inverse relationship between crime and incarceration. This doesn't prove causality, of course, but it's a good indicator to most folks.

[Larry W]

Again, that will be for the jury to decide, not rec.woodworking.

[Dave]

On Sat, 7 Jan 2012 21:24:41 -0500, "Mike Marlow"

There is often a definite advantage to law enforcement if some sort of trail can be established from where, when and who the gun was stolen from.

Consider this. A bunch of guns are stolen in the US and find their way into a smuggling ring that brings them up to Canada. (As has happened many times). Knowing where these guns came from in the US lets law enforcement focus on certain areas and travel routes more than others. Every little bit of knowledge helps in trying to prevent such occurrences.

How about a closely comparable example? Knowing where many/most of the illegal immigrants cross the Mexican border into the US, lets immigration concentrate more on a particular area.

Same situation, different subjects, both true. Tell me you dispute this?

[Mike M]

I can follow your logic. I used to have a gun and one day I found myself in a situation where I thought I was going to have to use it to save a friend's ass. Fortunately I didn't have to use it, but it scared the crap out of me when I realized all of the ramifications of using it. I haven't had a gun since then other then a rifle with ammunition so old I'd probably be safer having it pointed at me then shooting it. I guess when they cut the police force to where you have to protect yourself I'll reconsider.

Mike M

[Han]

"Josepi" wrote in news:B67Oq.55495$ [e-mail]:

As I understood it, the law still says it's illegal, but there is a gentleman's agreement (change wording as appropriate) that personal enjoyment is allowed, and serving that personal enjoyment in what in Amsterdam is called "coffeeshops" is fine too. Because of (mostly German) drug tourism and vandalism, such is not the case for non-citizens in communities very close to the German border. But, hey, I'm not really interested in it, so take it for what it is, usenet noise ...

[Han]

"Mike Marlow" wrote in news:d6bce$4f08fe7b$4b75eb81$ [e-mail]:

Are you saying that trafficking in stolen guns is so well established that we really shouldn't consider it illegal anymore? Your trains of thought are insane, IMNSHO. Of course, I admit that you think otherwise.

[Han]

"HeyBub" wrote in news:U9qdnd78xPIUnJTSnZ2dnUVZ [e-mail]:

Seems to me it would make a definite difference to the prosecution of the ccriminal(s).

Good for you. I hope things are well locked up in your house now.

Illegal guns then.

It amazes me that now you seem to imply that BATF should be more empowered, but that would be GOOD in my opinion, at least if they get the deadbrains out of the line of command.

My train of thought is - more poor and desperate people - easy drug use - more criminality - more incarceration. But then, that's another train of thought.

For the record, there are areas in Amsterdam (or other cities) where walking around at night may not be advisable. But I have walked round many areas of New York City without incidents of any consequence too, but mostly during daytime or early evening.

[Han]

Larry Jaques wrote in news: [e-mail]:

I switched from tilapia to swai because of price and apparent greater sustainability. And it also tastes better, IMO.